Does comedy news enhance political and environmental literacy? Elizabeth Anderson Word Count: 1803
For many years, comedy has been a way of getting people to understand the problems going on in their world. Court jesters in medieval times used the trick of being funny to tell their rulers what they were doing wrong in a way that did not get them in trouble. Today, comedy news show talk hosts tell the news in a way designed to make people laugh, and people like the Yes Men play pranks on people to prove a point. Many people see comedy news as entertainment and a good way to laugh at politicians. They might learn something about the news in the process. The stakeholders in this debate include a wide variety of people-those who produce comedy news (since they would be out of a job if their methods were not believed effective), corporations (who probably do not want everyone to know just how bad their corporate practices are), the media (some of whom might be forced out of a job, if comedy news were to become more popular; conversely, reporting pranks like the ones the Yes Men perform likely increases their numbers of viewers), and people affected by events brought to international attention by pranksters like the Yes Men (since these people hope that they will finally get help from the government or corporations that have wronged them). Some argue that comedy news helps people learn more about what is going on in the world, as well as politics in general, while others believe that comedy news is little more than just entertainment.
Chris Smith, in an article, America is a Joke in New York Magazine, describes the many appeals of comedy news. Comedy news makes people laugh, with “dirty” humor pointed towards politicians. Smith focuses on The Daily Show and describes the show’s history and what has made it so popular. He talks about the early days of the show and how much the host, John Stewart, changed things for the show, turning it into a show to both entertain and tell people about the news. Smith then goes on to talk about the Bush era and that ”[t]he Obama presidency was supposed to spell doom-or at least irrelevance-for Bush-satirizing comics like Stewart and his protégé Stephen Colbort” (Smith, 2). The Daily Show has not gone out of business yet, though; there are still plenty of things to be made fun of. Humorous things relating to American culture are a prominent part of his show, too. Smith explains Stewart’s style; he shows a clip of news, jokes about it, and inserts jokes about American culture in general. To help Stewart decide what news he is going to make fun of, Stewart and his employees watch the regular news; “[d]ownstairs, Daily Show staffers monitor every minute of Fox News and hundreds of political shows, at least until workplace-cruelty inspectors find out” (Smith, 2). The Daily Show, in Smith’s opinion, shows people the news in a different, refreshing, more truthful light. Comedy news will help people learn more about politics and the environment while being entertained.
Smith’s views do have a few flaws, though. He explains Stewart’s style as if it was perfectly normal and hilarious to all. Some people are offended by the sort of language or actions used in comedy news, especially since most of it is sexual in nature. Many parents would probably argue that comedy news shows like The Daily Show are not shows they can watch with their children. Other people may feel like they are being made fun of, and are unlikely to appreciate that. Also, comedy news may make people believe a certain way without giving them all the facts. For example, Stewart jokes about various political and governmental processes. While he might help people learn more about these processes, some of what is on his show may be disinformation. Smith does little to help further the argument that people can learn a lot from comedy news by not including scientific studies or similar information in his article. Most of what is said in the article are opinions, not necessarily facts. He does not address the other viewpoint-that comedy news does not help people increase their literacy of political and environmental issues, either.
An article, "'Fake' News Shows Less Important in Learning about Politics”, in Newswise from the Ohio State University states that comedy news does not teach people as much about politics and other issues as much as previously thought. This article does acknowledge that people may learn something from watching comedy news, but other sources may give them additional information. The article also suggests that people watching comedy news may have already formed their beliefs about the particular political character or event featured, and therefore are not being informed much by the comedy news, just strengthening their views; “[o]nce people sit down to watch a show, they may have already decided how and if they will use the information presented in each segment” (http://newswise.com/articles/fake-news-shows-less-important-in-learning-about-politics). For example, someone who already did not support George W. Bush might have watched a comedy news show making fun of the ex-president. This person might learn a few more reasons why not to support George W. Bush, but their mind will not be changed by the information, since they did not support Bush, anyway. The Newswise article also points out that not all of the information in comedy news shows is correct. As a result, people may not be informed about what is truly going on if comedy news is their only source of information. Real news, the article suggests, teaches people the facts about a particular event or candidate. The article discusses a study where people watched different shows about a particular candidate. The people watching the comedy news show knew more about the personal life of the candidate and based their opinion of the candidate on this, while the people watching regular news based their opinion of the candidate on the facts in the news show. The article does concede that people who watch comedy news will learn more than people who do not watch any type of news.
The Newswise article also has a few flaws. Some comedy news producers may strive to make their news as factual and accurate as possible. Also, the mainstream media does not do a perfect job of giving people all the facts. There are often personal attacks on political figures in the regular news. Other news may be convoluted or ignored; for example, the Occupy Wall Street movement down in New York City was ignored by the mainstream media until 700 people were arrested for protesting on the Brooklyn Bridge. The way the study was set up may not have been the most conducive to really finding out how comedy news influences people; people are likely to watch or read their favorite type of news every day or at another more frequent interval than a twenty-minute show one day of their lives, which is more how the study referenced in the article was conducted.
In an article, Laughing with the Yes Men: the Politics of Affirmation, in the Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, Maria Hynes, Scott Sharpe, and Bob Fagan go more into detail about the history of comedy news, as well as its successes. It discusses the Yes Men’s fake dissolution of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Even though this was fake, the article argues that people learned more about why the WTO is not as perfect as politicians make it out to be. They learned about a viewpoint not often discussed in the mainstream media. Also, the article notes, people believed the Yes Men when they said that the WTO would be dissolved; “[a]t the CPA meeting the Yes Men exploited the credulity of their audiences by recruiting them into the elaborate fiction of a trade organization governed by human rather than corporate principles” (Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan, 110). Exposing the hoaxes that the Yes Men perpetuate brings even more publicity to their cause, the article argues. The original conference or other event that they tell their hoax to might be a fairly small, not well known event, but, when their hoax is revealed, it might be really big news. Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan provide a much more complete and persuasive case for comedy news than Smith did in his America is a Joke article. They discuss real events and their aftermath, instead of just a “day in the life of” style that Smith had in his article. Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan address the other viewpoint, too, arguing that stunts like the ones the Yes Men pull help teach people more about the issues going on in their world.
My own view on the subject is that comedy news is likely to teach people more about news than they might otherwise have known. They will hopefully learn to question everything they are told, and seek out the facts. I also believe that the producers of comedy news should realize that at least some of their viewers might not be getting much news from other sources, and therefore should strive to make their news as factual and accurate as possible and not just rely on personal attacks and sexual humor. Joking or sarcasm about various political or environmental situations could possibly reach more people than solemn, regular news. Hopefully, most people will become interested in a particular situation or politician and research it more. I myself enjoy reading sarcastic or otherwise hilarious takes on the news sometimes. Sometimes, entertaining news stories may pique my interest and make me want to learn more about the particular topic. Other times, it is just a good laugh at the quirks of politicians, people in general, and American culture. I do also feel that part of the appeal of joking about the government and politicians is that many people feel that they cannot do anything about current situations. Poking fun and performing personal attacks on politicians is one thing people can do to relieve their frustrations with the government and feel like they are in control.
Sources Cited
"'Fake' News Shows Less Important in Learning about Politics." Newswise: News for Journalists, Press Release Distribution for Public Relations. Newswise, 8 Sept. 2008. Web. Retrieved: 18 Oct. 2011. http://newswise.com/articles/fake-news-shows-less-important-in-learning-about-politics.
Hynes, Maria, Scott Sharpe, and Bill Fagan. "Laughing with the Yes Men: the Politics of Affirmation." Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies. Volume 21.1 (2007): 107-21. Smith, Chris. "Why the Worst of Times for Politics and Media Has Been the Best of Times for Jon Stewart and 'The Daily Show' -- New York Magazine." New York Magazine -- NYC Guide to Restaurants, Fashion, Nightlife, Shopping, Politics, Movies. New York Magazine, 12 Sept. 2010. Web. Retrieved: 18 Oct. 2011. http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/68086/.
Elizabeth Anderson
Word Count: 1803
For many years, comedy has been a way of getting people to understand the problems going on in their world. Court jesters in medieval times used the trick of being funny to tell their rulers what they were doing wrong in a way that did not get them in trouble. Today, comedy news show talk hosts tell the news in a way designed to make people laugh, and people like the Yes Men play pranks on people to prove a point. Many people see comedy news as entertainment and a good way to laugh at politicians. They might learn something about the news in the process. The stakeholders in this debate include a wide variety of people-those who produce comedy news (since they would be out of a job if their methods were not believed effective), corporations (who probably do not want everyone to know just how bad their corporate practices are), the media (some of whom might be forced out of a job, if comedy news were to become more popular; conversely, reporting pranks like the ones the Yes Men perform likely increases their numbers of viewers), and people affected by events brought to international attention by pranksters like the Yes Men (since these people hope that they will finally get help from the government or corporations that have wronged them). Some argue that comedy news helps people learn more about what is going on in the world, as well as politics in general, while others believe that comedy news is little more than just entertainment.
Chris Smith, in an article, America is a Joke in New York Magazine, describes the many appeals of comedy news. Comedy news makes people laugh, with “dirty” humor pointed towards politicians. Smith focuses on The Daily Show and describes the show’s history and what has made it so popular. He talks about the early days of the show and how much the host, John Stewart, changed things for the show, turning it into a show to both entertain and tell people about the news. Smith then goes on to talk about the Bush era and that ”[t]he Obama presidency was supposed to spell doom-or at least irrelevance-for Bush-satirizing comics like Stewart and his protégé Stephen Colbort” (Smith, 2). The Daily Show has not gone out of business yet, though; there are still plenty of things to be made fun of. Humorous things relating to American culture are a prominent part of his show, too. Smith explains Stewart’s style; he shows a clip of news, jokes about it, and inserts jokes about American culture in general. To help Stewart decide what news he is going to make fun of, Stewart and his employees watch the regular news; “[d]ownstairs, Daily Show staffers monitor every minute of Fox News and hundreds of political shows, at least until workplace-cruelty inspectors find out” (Smith, 2). The Daily Show, in Smith’s opinion, shows people the news in a different, refreshing, more truthful light. Comedy news will help people learn more about politics and the environment while being entertained.
Smith’s views do have a few flaws, though. He explains Stewart’s style as if it was perfectly normal and hilarious to all. Some people are offended by the sort of language or actions used in comedy news, especially since most of it is sexual in nature. Many parents would probably argue that comedy news shows like The Daily Show are not shows they can watch with their children. Other people may feel like they are being made fun of, and are unlikely to appreciate that. Also, comedy news may make people believe a certain way without giving them all the facts. For example, Stewart jokes about various political and governmental processes. While he might help people learn more about these processes, some of what is on his show may be disinformation. Smith does little to help further the argument that people can learn a lot from comedy news by not including scientific studies or similar information in his article. Most of what is said in the article are opinions, not necessarily facts. He does not address the other viewpoint-that comedy news does not help people increase their literacy of political and environmental issues, either.
An article, "'Fake' News Shows Less Important in Learning about Politics”, in Newswise from the Ohio State University states that comedy news does not teach people as much about politics and other issues as much as previously thought. This article does acknowledge that people may learn something from watching comedy news, but other sources may give them additional information. The article also suggests that people watching comedy news may have already formed their beliefs about the particular political character or event featured, and therefore are not being informed much by the comedy news, just strengthening their views; “[o]nce people sit down to watch a show, they may have already decided how and if they will use the information presented in each segment” (http://newswise.com/articles/fake-news-shows-less-important-in-learning-about-politics). For example, someone who already did not support George W. Bush might have watched a comedy news show making fun of the ex-president. This person might learn a few more reasons why not to support George W. Bush, but their mind will not be changed by the information, since they did not support Bush, anyway. The Newswise article also points out that not all of the information in comedy news shows is correct. As a result, people may not be informed about what is truly going on if comedy news is their only source of information. Real news, the article suggests, teaches people the facts about a particular event or candidate. The article discusses a study where people watched different shows about a particular candidate. The people watching the comedy news show knew more about the personal life of the candidate and based their opinion of the candidate on this, while the people watching regular news based their opinion of the candidate on the facts in the news show. The article does concede that people who watch comedy news will learn more than people who do not watch any type of news.
The Newswise article also has a few flaws. Some comedy news producers may strive to make their news as factual and accurate as possible. Also, the mainstream media does not do a perfect job of giving people all the facts. There are often personal attacks on political figures in the regular news. Other news may be convoluted or ignored; for example, the Occupy Wall Street movement down in New York City was ignored by the mainstream media until 700 people were arrested for protesting on the Brooklyn Bridge. The way the study was set up may not have been the most conducive to really finding out how comedy news influences people; people are likely to watch or read their favorite type of news every day or at another more frequent interval than a twenty-minute show one day of their lives, which is more how the study referenced in the article was conducted.
In an article, Laughing with the Yes Men: the Politics of Affirmation, in the Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, Maria Hynes, Scott Sharpe, and Bob Fagan go more into detail about the history of comedy news, as well as its successes. It discusses the Yes Men’s fake dissolution of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Even though this was fake, the article argues that people learned more about why the WTO is not as perfect as politicians make it out to be. They learned about a viewpoint not often discussed in the mainstream media. Also, the article notes, people believed the Yes Men when they said that the WTO would be dissolved; “[a]t the CPA meeting the Yes Men exploited the credulity of their audiences by recruiting them into the elaborate fiction of a trade organization governed by human rather than corporate principles” (Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan, 110). Exposing the hoaxes that the Yes Men perpetuate brings even more publicity to their cause, the article argues. The original conference or other event that they tell their hoax to might be a fairly small, not well known event, but, when their hoax is revealed, it might be really big news. Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan provide a much more complete and persuasive case for comedy news than Smith did in his America is a Joke article. They discuss real events and their aftermath, instead of just a “day in the life of” style that Smith had in his article. Hynes, Sharpe, and Fagan address the other viewpoint, too, arguing that stunts like the ones the Yes Men pull help teach people more about the issues going on in their world.
My own view on the subject is that comedy news is likely to teach people more about news than they might otherwise have known. They will hopefully learn to question everything they are told, and seek out the facts. I also believe that the producers of comedy news should realize that at least some of their viewers might not be getting much news from other sources, and therefore should strive to make their news as factual and accurate as possible and not just rely on personal attacks and sexual humor. Joking or sarcasm about various political or environmental situations could possibly reach more people than solemn, regular news. Hopefully, most people will become interested in a particular situation or politician and research it more. I myself enjoy reading sarcastic or otherwise hilarious takes on the news sometimes. Sometimes, entertaining news stories may pique my interest and make me want to learn more about the particular topic. Other times, it is just a good laugh at the quirks of politicians, people in general, and American culture. I do also feel that part of the appeal of joking about the government and politicians is that many people feel that they cannot do anything about current situations. Poking fun and performing personal attacks on politicians is one thing people can do to relieve their frustrations with the government and feel like they are in control.
Sources Cited
"'Fake' News Shows Less Important in Learning about Politics." Newswise: News for Journalists, Press Release Distribution for Public Relations. Newswise, 8 Sept. 2008. Web. Retrieved: 18 Oct. 2011. http://newswise.com/articles/fake-news-shows-less-important-in-learning-about-politics.
Hynes, Maria, Scott Sharpe, and Bill Fagan. "Laughing with the Yes Men: the Politics of Affirmation." Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies. Volume 21.1 (2007): 107-21.
Smith, Chris. "Why the Worst of Times for Politics and Media Has Been the Best of Times for Jon Stewart and 'The Daily Show' -- New York Magazine." New York Magazine -- NYC Guide to Restaurants, Fashion, Nightlife, Shopping, Politics, Movies. New York Magazine, 12 Sept. 2010. Web. Retrieved: 18 Oct. 2011. http://nymag.com/arts/tv/profiles/68086/.